Disposed

Diya.S.L. v. Director of General Education

Kerala HC9 Jan 2024WP(C)/29/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A student denied first rank in the District School Kalolsavam challenged the appellate committee's rejection of her appeal. She had already participated in the State Kalolsavam under an interim order but did not secure top ranks. The Court confirmed the interim order and directed authorities to grant any collateral benefits, such as grace marks.

What did the court decide?

Interim order permitting participation confirmed; authorities directed to grant any collateral benefits (e.g., grace marks) entitled based on her performance, as per law.

Diya.S.L. Vs Director of General Education — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 19TH POUSHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 29 OF 2024

¶4

PETITIONER:

¶5

DIYA.S.L.
AGED 16 YEARS
(MINOR), DIYA, ALAPPURAM, NEDUMANGAD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 541, REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER
LEKSHMI.O.V., AGED 43 YEARS, W/O J. SANTHOSH KUMAR,
DIYA, ALAPPURAM, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695541
BY ADV K.RAJESH KANNAN

¶6

RESPONDENTS:

¶7

1 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION O/O THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014

¶8

2 KALOLSAVAM COMMITTEE CONVENOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PADMAVILASOM ROAD, FORT (P.O.), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695029

¶9

3 CHAIRMAN APPEAL COMMITTEE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM O/O THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PADMAVILASOM ROAD, FORT (P.O.), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695029

¶10

SMT. VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C) NO. 29 OF 2024 2

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

The petitioner says that she participated in an event in the ‘District School Kalolsavam’, but was not awarded the First Rank; thus denying her the opportunity of moving to the next level, namely the ‘State Kalolsavam’, which has now been completed.

¶15

The petitioner asserts that the results of the ‘District Level Kalolsavam’ were egregiously improper and therefore, that she preferred an Appeal before the Statutory Appellate Committee, as is provided under the Manual relating to the ‘Revenue District Kalolsavam’; but that the said Committee has rejected it, through the impugned order, without citing tenable reasons, but on hyper technical grounds.

¶16

The petitioner, therefore, prays that the impugned order be set aside and that she be allowed to participate in the ‘Kerala State School Kalolsavam’.

¶17

Hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner in this case, at the time when this matter was considered for admission and adverting to the allegations and assertions made and contentions impelled, this Court passed an interim order, allowing the petitioner to participate in the ‘State Kalolsavam’, however, clarifying that it will only be provisional. It was also made clear in the said order that, if the

¶18

WP(C) NO. 29 OF 2024 3

¶19

petitioner is to obtain Rank Nos.1, 2 or 3, same shall be declared only after obtaining orders from this Court.

¶20

The ‘State School Kalolsavam’ was completed on 08.01.2024 and this Court is now told that the petitioner has not obtained any of the first three ranks; and that all results have been declared, with the Kannur District being adjudged the Cup Winner.

¶21

Obviously, therefore, all which now remains is to consider whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of any grace marks that she may obtain through her performance, pursuant to the interim order of this Court.

¶22

Though, as I have already said above, the interim order clearly provided that the performance of the petitioner would be provisional, I am of the view that since she has performed, any resultant benefit that can inure to her, ought not to be denied. This is because, the best that the petitioner would obtain is only grace marks, depending upon whether she has obtained ‘A Grade’ or otherwise; and I do not think that it will be justified for this Court to deny that to the contestants, solely for the reason that her Appeal had been dismissed at the ‘Revenue District School Kalolsavam’ level. The interim order by this Court was issued after due thought and finding a prima facie case in favour of the petitioner; but since she has not been able to obtain

¶23

WP(C) NO. 29 OF 2024 4

¶24

the first of the three ranks, I am of the firm view that it would not be necessary for this Court to enter into the merits of any other rival contentions.

¶25

Obviously, therefore, all which this Court has to now do is to confirm the interim order, so that the petitioner would obtain all collateral benefits entitled, based on her performance in the ‘State Level Kalolsavam’.

¶26

In the afore circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of, confirming the interim order granted by this Court earlier and directing the Authorities to grant all benefits that may be entitled to the petitioner, if any, based on her performance, as per law.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

MC/16.1

¶31

WP(C) NO. 29 OF 2024 5

¶32

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29/2024

¶33

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.C(4)/8910/2023/D.D.E DATED 27.12.2023
OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Diya.S.L. v. Director of General Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Diya.S.L. v. Director of General Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gouri Nanda Krishna Vs State of Kerala

Benny Gervacis Vs Dr.v. Venu

Gowri Lakshmi.R. Vs State of Kerala

Diya.S.L. Vs Director of General Education

Ananya Aravindan Vs Director of General Education

M. v Vishwanathan Vs Kerala Water Authority